This squib demonstrates how process-specific constraints—in which related but distinct processes in a language can be subject to differing conditions—can be captured with Boolean monadic recursive schemes (BMRSs), a computational formalism for phonological analysis based in mathematical logic. We use the case study of pharyngeal harmony in Palestinian Arabic, which motivated a discussion between Davis (1995) and McCarthy (1997) about the relative advantages and drawbacks of rule-based and Optimality Theory frameworks. We show how BMRS grammars naturally capture process-specific constraints in a way comparable to OT, while still being more computationally restrictive.

We use model theory to rigorously evaluate Q-Theory as proposed in Shih and Inkelas 2019 as an alternative to Autosegmental Phonology. We find that Q-Theory is remarkably similar to Autosegmental Phonology, contra some of Shih and Inkelas’s claims. In particular, Q-Theory does not eschew the association relation, in Q-Theory the tone-bearing unit is the vowel, and Q-Theory and Autosegmental Phonology are equivalent in terms of the constraints they can express. However, this formal analysis clarifies the truly novel contribution of Q-Theory, which is the empirical claim that all segments are tripartite.